JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Logginidou, H. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cronin, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Logginidou, H. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cronin, A. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Neuroanesthesia
Right arrow Monitoring (Non-cardiac)
Right arrow Pharmacology

Anesth Analg 2003;97:1784-1788
© 2003 International Anesthesia Research Society

NEUROSURGICAL ANESTHESIA

Propofol Suppresses the Cortical Somatosensory Evoked Potential in Rats

Helene G. Logginidou, MD, Bai-Han Li, MD, De-Pei Li, MD, Jeffrey S. Lohmann, MS CCC-A, H. Gregg Schuler, BA, Nicole A. DiVittore, BS, Sarah Kreiser, BS, and Arthur J. Cronin, MD

Department of Anesthesiology, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Arthur J. Cronin, MD, 500 University Dr., H187, Hershey, PA 17033. Address e-mail to acronin{at}psu.edu

The dose-response curve for the effect of volatile anesthetics on the somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) is well described, but for propofol, the large dose segment of the curve is undefined. We describe the effect of increasing plasma concentrations of propofol on cortical SEPs in 18 rats. After surgical preparation under ketamine anesthesia, a remifentanil infusion was begun at 2.5, 5, or 10 µg · kg-1 · min-1. After 20 min, the propofol infusion was initiated at 20 mg · kg-1 · h-1 and was increased to 40, 60, and 80 mg · kg-1 · h-1 at 20-min intervals. SEP was recorded before remifentanil infusion, before propofol infusion rate changes, and 30 min after discontinuing propofol infusion. In six additional rats, the plasma concentrations of propofol after each 20-min infusion were measured using gas chromatography. Remifentanil did not have a significant effect, but propofol significantly depressed the SEP amplitude and prolonged the latency at infusion rates of 40 mg · kg-1 · h-1 and more. Propofol’s effect was dose-dependent, but even at 80 mg · kg-1 · h-1 with an estimated plasma concentration of 31.6 ± 3.4 µg/mL (10.8 50% effective concentration), a measurable response was present in 44.5% of rats. These results suggest that even at large doses, propofol and remifentanil provide adequate conditions for SEP monitoring.

IMPLICATIONS: Rats demonstrate dose-dependent somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) suppression with propofol but not with remifentanil. However, SEP suppression by 50% occurred only at large (1.5 EC50) concentrations of propofol, and a measurable SEP was present in 8 of 18 rats, even at 10.8 EC50.






Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2003 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.